Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
L-1011 Vs DC-10  
User currently offlineJonnealis From United States of America, joined Sep 2002, 9 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3121 times:

I have flown for many years and on all types of aircraft. However I have not flown on a DC-10 or Lockheed 1011. Which of the aircrafts are better. ?

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6287 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3110 times:

Better? Neither. I've flown both many many times and I can assure you that you cannot tell the difference from the cabin. Today you wouldn't even be able to tell a difference from service level.


Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
User currently offlineCessnapimp From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1320 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3107 times:

Out of my heart, I would choose the L-1011. It is a more technologically advanced aircraft, with a better safety record. but we all know which one was the greater commercial success. The L-1011 is a fascination for more than one poster here. I am lucky to have served on them back in my Air Transat days. A solid airplane. Highly rated by pilots. Nice figure. But I do like all Tri- Jets. I was doing a YVR- LAX the other day and I happened to see a Hawaian DC-10 pull into the gate right in front of me... what a sight.

As for the 1011, if only its engine troubles would've been dealt with when the project was still in its infancy, I believe we would have seen a higher number of 1011's than 10's.

My 2 cents,

Grégoire


User currently offlineGaruda From Indonesia, joined Nov 2000, 584 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3077 times:

I've never flown a Tristar before, and the Diesel-Ten is my first jet experience, so I'll could be a bit biased here.

However, as Cessnapimp has said, Tristars are more advanced technologically, and they have RR-engines (my favourites). So in (my) technical standpoint, L1011 wins.

But I like DC-10 looks better than L1011, I never like L-1011's nose, it's one of the ugliest airplane nose I've ever seen (although I like the -500 series, but I always fond of all long-range, shorter bodied derivative, like the 747SP, A342 and Tristars-500). And the cockpit windows of the DC-10s, they're huge!!. I have talked to a DC-10 captain before, and he said that in terms of manuvering airplane in the ground, nothing beats the DC-10, mostly because of the huge cockpit windows. Not sure about the cabin windows in L1011s, but those in the DC-10s are the biggest among all the airplanes I've ever flown (compared to those tiny windows in Airbusess or new Boeings).

And the best thing about the DC-10 is the take-off. I heard ppl saying that take-offs in B752 is like inside a rocket, not sure abt that though since I've never flown on one, but I flew a 25 yrs old DC-10 last July and it still leaped to the sky effortlessly.

In all, my choice is still the DC-10, despite the early safety record

JA


User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3069 times:

The L-1011 has had an excellent safety record with no major accidents due to design defects like the DC-10. I like the movable control devices on the wings that come up during turbulence to stabilize the aircraft.

User currently offlineL-1011-500 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3058 times:

Ok, look at my Username, that should tell you what plane I prefer.  Big grin

Garuda - Umm...I think you may be mistaken. Pilots have been quoted as saying that the L-1011's front office can be likened to sitting in a "fishbowl."


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andy Vanderheyden



TEDSKI - You were referring to what is called the Active Aileron System, which controls stabilization and minimizes turbulence effects.

The L-1011 is a far better aircraft that the DC-10 IMO. Very underrated.

L-1011-500


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Joe Fernandez - Aviation Photography of Miami



Note how the L-1011 is above the DC-10  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3051 times:

Has anyone flown on the MD-11? Now that is a great plane to fly on over it's older sister the DC-10.

User currently offlineSAS23 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3030 times:

The L1011 is a far better designed and built aircraft than the DC10 - Sioux City would never have happened on an L1011.

The RB211-524B4I engines are marginally Stage IV compliant compared with the marginally Stage III compliant CF6-50C2. They also burn up to 15% less fuel than the CF6 ... the reason they are quieter, with lower emissions and fuel burn is due to their triple spool design.

The DC10-30 outperforms the L1011s in terms of range (except the -500) and payload.


User currently offlineRyanair!!! From Australia, joined Mar 2002, 4753 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3020 times:

I have flown the DC10 (AA, NW), MD11 (SR, LX) and L1101 (CX) so i guess i am lucky. I always thought the Tristar looks so much better than the DC10 because the profile was simply timeless.

Still on the L1101, engine no 2 looks so elegant being flushed against the tail and that s-curve is so sexy.

The MD11 was a little quieter than the DC10 and the distinctive "whine" while the aircraft is powering up for take off is also absent, unlike the latter.



Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2988 times:

The L-1011 has four hydraulic lines, each one is apart from the other and not close together like the three hydraulic lines on the DC-10. If the hydraulic lines were separate on the DC-10, the incident at Sioux City would not have happened. The L-1011 has a slat locking system and one way shut off valves that the DC-10 lacks. The AA Flt 191 crash at ORD in May 1979 could have been prevented if the slats were locked so they would not have retracted after the engine separated ripping the hydraulic lines in the wing. The one way shut off valves could have prevented the loss of hydraulic fluid.

User currently offlineJonnealis From United States of America, joined Sep 2002, 9 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2966 times:

Thank you all for the comments. They are all very informative. What is the difference between the MD-11 and the other two planes?

Jon


User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24923 posts, RR: 56
Reply 11, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2954 times:

Flown on an L1011 - My best flight so far in my life
Flying on a DC-10 next month - Look out for my trip report
 Big thumbs up



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineBWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2917 times:


I like the L1011 my last flight was on August 16th 2002 on BWIA. One of the things I like best about the L1011 is the way that it doors closed and opened with the touch of a button. I have always found the that the flight attendants having to actually open the door so archaic and the L1011 automated door should be standard on all new widebody jets.

PS
Better on the eyes than the DC10 as the engine was blended into the plane


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael F. McLaughlin




Eagles Soar!
User currently offlineBroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2825 times:

As far as riding, the L-1011 flys more nose up than the DC-10. FA's have to heft the service carts uphill (they do have brakes) when moving through the cabin. It's not a lot, but it is noticeable.
The L-1011 is an analog electronic airplane (I believe that some -500's are digital) versus the digital electronics of today. The DC-10 is a big hydro-mechanical airplane; like the DC-8 and DC-9, only bigger.
An Eastern L-1011 had a fan disc failure on a #2 engine during climb out from JFK; the fragments severed lines in 3 of the 4 systems (damaged, but did not penetrate the lines in the 4th) or it would have had a worse problem than the Sioux City DC-10. The stabilizer would have gone full Airplane Nose Up.
The view from the jumpseat on an L-1011 is magnificent!! The window starts at your hip and goes above your head. You are sitting behind and a little outboard of the captain.
I'll be flying on DC-10-30's from DTW-FCO-DTW next month; I'll let you know how it goes.


User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2709 times:

BTW, active ailerons were only installed on the -500's with their bigger wing and heavier loading. Part of the function was to reduce wing bending loads. AFAIK, it was never refitted to the longbodies.

Steve


User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2646 times:

Man, I wonder what would have happened if Lockheed got the chance to produce an L-1011NG. That would have been pretty damn cool. The L-1011 was so far ahead of it's time when it came out. I wonder what gadgets they would have now?

User currently offlineAamd11 From UK - Wales, joined Nov 2001, 1059 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2600 times:

The L1011NG would:

* Require NO flight crew at all
* be silent at all times of flight due to its amazing new engines [RR of course, keeping in line with the original]
*be the best thing since sliced bread basically  Smokin cool

A^A MD-11


User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (11 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2553 times:

I prefer the L1011 one for the simple fact that it has the RR engines. But the L10 is a better designed aicraft and that Lockheed was really trying when they designed it to impress the world and it lasted longer in service then a lot of the DC-10's. Rolls Royce Forever.


FutureFO



I Don't know where I am anymore
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
MD-11 VS DC-10 posted Thu Aug 31 2006 19:26:03 by Eastern023
DC-10 30 Vs DC-10 40 posted Thu Mar 18 2004 21:18:34 by Hawaii50
MD-10 Vs. DC-10 posted Sun Aug 12 2001 19:19:01 by Ren41
Airlines With Both L-1011 And DC-10 posted Sat Feb 24 2001 14:59:09 by Republic
L-1011 Or DC-10, In Your Opinion posted Wed Dec 13 2000 05:05:46 by L-1011-500
A300 VS L1011 VS DC-10 posted Wed Jun 21 2000 04:58:34 by Pacific
DL L-1011 Vs. AA/UA DC-10 posted Thu Aug 2 2001 17:12:10 by Modesto2
DC-10 Vs. L-1011 posted Sat Jun 19 1999 22:09:12 by DeltaShuttle
Airlines Who Flew DC-10/L-1011 Together Profitably posted Mon Nov 28 2005 21:37:42 by NW727251ADV
Trivia Time-Dual DC-10/L-1011 Users posted Thu Dec 25 2003 16:25:20 by FlagshipAZ